Priscilla Alma Jose v. Ramon C. Javellana, et al G.R. No. 158239 January 25, 2012 acts! Margarita sold for consideration of P160,000.00 to Ramon Javellana by deed of conditional sale two parcels of land in Guiguinto, ulacan. !"ey agreed t"at Javellana would pay P#0,000.00 upon t"e e$ecution of t"e deed and t"e balance of P#0,000.00 P#0,000.00 upon t"e registration of t"e parcels of land under t"e !orrens %ystem &t"e registration being underta'en by Margarita wit"in a reasonable period of time() and t"at s"ould Margarita become incapacitated, "er son and attorney*in*fact, attorney*in*fact, Juvenal, and "er daug"ter, petitioner Priscilla Priscilla M. +lma Jose, would receive receive t"e payment of t"e balance and proceed wit" t"e application for registration. +fter +fter Margarita died and wit" Juvenal "aving predeceased predeceased Margarita owever, Priscilla Priscilla did not comply wit" t"e underta'ing to cause t"e registration of t"e properties under t"e !orrens %ystem, and, instead, began to improve t"e properties by dumping -lling materials t"erein wit" t"e intention of converting t"e parcels of land into a residential or industrial subdivision. Javellana commenced an action for speci-c performance, inunction, and damages against "er in t"e R!/ R!/ Malolos, ulacan. Javellana averred averred t"at "e "ad paid t"e full consideration and t"at in 16, Priscilla "ad called to inuire about t"e mortgage constituted on t"e parcels pa rcels of land) and t"at "e "ad told "er t"en t"at t"e parcels of land "ad not been mortgaged but "ad been sold to "im. Javellana prayed for t"e issuance of a !R2 or writ of preliminary preliminary inunction to restrain Priscilla Priscilla from dumping -lling materials in t"e parcels of land) and t"at Priscilla Priscilla be ordered ordered to institute registration proceedings and t"en to e$ecute a -nal deed of sale in "is favor. favor. Priscilla -led a motion to dismiss, stating t"at t"e complaint was already barred barred by prescription) and t"at t"e complaint did not state a cause of action. R!/ initially denied Priscilla3s motion to dismiss. owever, upon "er motion for reconsideration, t"e R!/ reversed itself and granted t"e motion to dismiss, opining t"at Javellana "ad no cause of action against "er due to "er not being bound to comply wit" t"e terms of t"e deed of conditional sale for not being a party pa rty t"ereto) t"at t"ere was no evidence s"owing t"e payment of t"e balance) t"at "e "ad never demanded t"e registration of t"e land from Margarita or Juvenal, or broug"t a suit for speci-c performance against
Margarita or Juvenal) and t"at "is claim of paying t"e balance was not credible. Javellana moved for reconsideration, contending t"at t"e presentation of evidence of full payment was not necessary at t"at stage of t"e proceedings) and t"at in resolving a motion to dismiss on t"e ground of failure to state a cause of action, t"e facts alleged in t"e complaint were "ypot"etically admitted and only t"e allegations in t"e complaint s"ould be considered in resolving t"e motion. R!/ denied t"e motion for reconsideration for lac' of any reason to disturb t"e order. Javellana -led a notice of appeal w"ic" t"e R!/ gave due course to, and t"e records were elevated to t"e /ourt of +ppeals &/+(.Priscilla countered t"at t"e order was not appealable) t"at t"e appeal was not perfected on time) and t"at Javellana was guilty of forum s"opping. 4t appears t"at pending t"e appeal, Javellana also -led a petition for certiorari in t"e /+ assail to orders dismissing "is complaint. owever, t"e /+ dismissed t"e petition for certiorari, -nding t"at t"e R!/ did not commit grave abuse of discretion in issuing t"e orders, and "olding t"at it only committed, at most, an error of udgment correctible by appeal in issuing t"e c"allenged orders. /+ reversed and set aside t"e dismissal of /ivil /ase remanding t"e records to t"e R!/ 5for furt"er proceedings in accordance wit" law.5 /+ denied t"e MR, "ence t"is petition.
"ssues! 27 Javellana committed forum s"opping
#el$! 7o, Javellana did not commit forum s"opping. +ccording to t"e %/, forum s"opping is t"e act of a party litigant against w"om an adverse udgment "as been rendered in one forum see'ing and possibly getting a favorable opinion in anot"er forum, ot"er t"an by appeal or t"e special civil action of certiorari, or t"e institution of two or more actions or proceedings grounded on t"e same cause or supposition t"a t one or t"e ot"er court would ma'e a favorable disposition. 8orum s"opping
"appens w"en, in t"e two or more pending cases, t"ere is identity of parties, identity of rig"ts or causes of action, and identity of reliefs soug"t. "ere t"e elements of litis pendentia are present, and w"ere a -nal udgment in one case will amount to res judicata in t"e ot"er, t"ere is forum s"opping. ere, pending t"e resolution of t"e appeal on t"e R!/ decision, Javellana -led a petition for certiorari in /+ assailing R!/ upon granting of t"e motion to dismiss -led by +lma Jose and t"e denial of t"e motion for t"e consideration to disturb t"e latter. 8or forum s"opping to e$ist, bot" actions must involve t"e same transaction, same essential facts and circumstances and must raise identical causes of action, subect matter and issues. ence, forum s"opping is not committed by Javellana as "e uestioned di9erent orders, two distinct causes of action and issues were raised, and two obectives were soug"t.
